Military Symbols Pdf - Open Access Policy Institutional Open Access Program Special Issues Guidelines Editorial Process Research and Publication Ethics Article Handling of Charges Awards Acknowledgments
All articles published by are immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No specific permission is required to reuse all or part of an article published by, including figures and tables. For articles published under the Creative Common CC BY open access license, any part of the article may be reused without permission as long as the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https:///openaccess.
Military Symbols Pdf
The feature papers represent cutting-edge research with significant potential for high impact in the field. The feature papers are subject to the individual invitation or recommendation of the scientific editors and are subject to a peer review before publication.
Page:nara Style Guide.pdf/25
A feature paper can be either an original research article, a fairly new research study that often involves multiple techniques or approaches, or a complete with complete and accurate updates on the latest developments in the field. interesting developments in a scientific field. Literature. This type of paper provides an outlook on future research directions or potential applications.
Editor's Choice articles are based on the recommendations of scientific editors of journals around the world. The editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe to be particularly interesting for readers, or important in the relevant research field. It aims to provide a snapshot of some of the most interesting works published in the various research areas of the journal.
Received: 23 January 2020 / Revised: 17 February 2020 / Accepted: 27 February 2020 / Published: 28 February 2020
Cartographic symbols on crisis maps serve as a means to display information about the position, characteristics and/or numerical values of objects, phenomena or specific actions for crisis mapping. Many crisis mapping concepts require simple, clear, categorical, and visually organized symbols that can be easily read and understood by a wide range of crisis map users. Map symbol sets for crisis mapping depend on effective graphic design, good availability (sharing and promotion, dissemination and announcement) and standardization (ensuring the common and reusable use of map symbols). In this study, we aim to assess the extent of these challenges in existing cartographic symbols for crisis mapping. Through a comparative study of prominent symbol sets, we analyzed the efforts made so far and suggested future directions. The results of this study may help to understand the less unified or consistent symbols currently in use, or to revise or expand existing sets for future publication.
Military Hardware Check Stock Vector Images
Sharing and understanding complex spatial, thematic and temporal information in a timely, visual and compelling manner is critical during crisis response. Cartography plays an important role in providing reliable, understandable, attractive, user-friendly visual information through maps [1]. A crisis map is a thematic map on which objects, phenomena or actions related to crisis management are displayed according to their importance and highlighted with appropriate cartographic symbols [1, 2]. The cartographic symbols on such maps serve as a means to visualize information about the position, characteristics and/or numerical values of objects, phenomena, or actions related to the crisis event. They are essential to communicate with heterogeneous audiences in the unique environment of a crisis characterized by the immediate threat of substantial loss and stress. Consequently, many crisis mapping concepts rely on simple, clear, aesthetically pleasing symbols that can be easily read and understood by a wide range of crisis map users [ 2 , 3 , 4 ]. If they are unintelligible, unintelligible, vague, unclassified, random, or lack a hierarchical organization and other important design features, they can fail to convey the desired message and can be local, regional and international. The cooperatives can complicate management strategies of crisis
The problem of ineffective mapping that fails to convey messages during a crisis was highlighted after Hurricane Andrew (in the Bahamas and the southeast coast of the United States in 1992) and Hurricane Fran (in the United States in 1996). research was done on how the cards produced during or immediately after these events were used. The same problem was identified after major tragedies such as the terrorist attacks of September 11 (in the United States in 2001), the Christmas tsunami (off the coasts of Indonesia, Thailand, Sri Lanka and India in 2004) and Hurricane Katrina. USA, 2005).
Immediately after these events, problems were identified, such as the lack of cartographic symbols for communication in crisis situations, and visually overloaded maps that reduced usability and made it difficult to understand essential crisis information [2 ]. The need for cartographic symbols has been adapted specifically for use in crisis maps. As a result, sets of cartographic symbols have been created specifically for communication and action in crises and have been promoted in the crisis community.
Despite the fact that they were designed for the same purpose, these symbols differ in many aspects. At first glance, the most striking difference is the graphic aspect of the symbols, from specific pictorial symbols economically designed to very simple abstract geometric shapes (Figure 1). They also differ in how they are organized in a set, organized structurally and visually, how they are shared, disseminated and shared between organizations, that is, the extent to which they are generally recognized and accepted, etc.
Adp1_02 Pages 151 200
Although the latest research in crisis management has mainly covered the technical aspects of improving the operation and strengthening the ability to respond to the crisis [4], there are still important characteristics to be studied to determine Needs how easy it is to use symbols. Four general challenges related to the development of iconography for the crisis map are identified in a recent study by Kostelnik and Honeyjes [14] through a review of the cartographic literature and the results of a survey carried out among different humanitarian organizations. These are: (1) symbol classification, (2) symbol design issues, (3) symbol availability, sharing and announcement, (4) the standardization process in the wider community.
In this study, we aim to examine the extent of these challenges in the current cartographic paradigm for crisis mapping. Through a comparative study of prominent examples of existing symbol sets, our objectives were to analyze the efforts made so far and to suggest future directions. We have focused specifically on the sets that have undergone new, revised or expanded editions and examined whether the latest implemented changes manage to meet the challenges of the crisis map symbolism.
We were guided by the following research questions. (1) Symbol Classification: What is the classification of cartographic symbols into sets and their internal breakdown? What graphic variables are used to support the visual and cognitive organization of symbols in a set? (2) Design of the symbol: Does the set include all the basic geometric-graphic elements (point, line and area) to represent the position and quality of objects? Does its design respect graphic and semantic qualities (such as simplicity, clarity, visibility, aesthetic appeal, traditionalism, familiarity, general acceptability, classification, concreteness, semantic proximity)? (3) Availability: Where and how can the symbol set be easily found? How and in what form are the symbols shared? How are they developed? Are there study and training resources available (user manuals, best practice guidelines, etc.)? (4) Standardization: Can the set be extended with additional symbols? Are there guidelines for the graphic design of new symbols? Has there been a review of the design, operation and identification of cartographic symbols on crisis maps?
We examined six sets of cartographic symbols published in different countries. Three were designed specifically for crisis management (American Emergency Response Symbology, Canadian All-Hazard Symbology, Australian All-Hazard Symbology), while two were intended for humanitarian activities (OCHA Humanitarian Icons and Demining Map Symbols Humanitarian). Operations (ILM). -STD-2525 Common Symbology of War). The main selection criterion was that all sets of cartographic symbols should contain symbols that represent specific objects, phenomena and actions for crisis management, regardless of their primary purpose. Other criteria were its availability in the public domain and its recognition by the cartographic scientific community and crisis cartographers [11, 15, 16, 17].
Military Icons Set Variant Royalty Free Vector Image
To begin, we have organized general information about each set of cartographic symbols: its official name and country of origin, the institution responsible, the year it became public, the date of annexation and / or new additions Edition, Internet source, format in which symbols are available for download, and terms of use.
We then performed a comparative analysis to examine, compare and contrast specific aspects of the taxonomy of symbols, their design, standardization and availability in the six sets of selected cartographic symbols.
(1) Regarding the classification of symbols, if the symbols in the set were classified into groups, we comparatively analyzed their distribution in categories, order patterns and connection orders. We analyzed how the thematic organization in categories was transferred to the graphic appearance of the symbols. A set of cartographic symbols must be selective in its duplication to clearly distinguish its affiliation to a particular type, but also, in each type, be contiguous to clearly indicate its affiliation [18]. Available graphic variables (also called visual variables as defined by Burton [19]) are size, shape, color hue, color value, texture and orientation. This initial set was later expanded to include two variables used in map design.
